5 ms·

If they force california companies to do this to out of state employees, for sure they'd lose that argunment. The interesting provision of the FAA is this one:

If they force california companies to do this to out of state employees, for sure they'd lose that argunment. The interesting provision of the FAA is this one: " but nothing herein contained shall apply to contracts of employment of seamen, railroad employees, or any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce."

marcoperaza 8y ago
There was a case about that provision, Circuit City v. Adams, and it was held that it only works to exclude transportation workers from the FAA. By the legal maxim ejusdem generis, a catch-all provision, like "any other class..." here, is generally interpreted to only include things of the same kind as the previous items in the list. Edit: I had some commentary about the case here, but upon a closer read of the majority and dissenting opinions, it's really not as clear cut as I thought. There's plenty of good reasons to agree or disagree with what the Court did in Circuit City.
- DannyBee 8y ago
  Thanks. I was just too lazy to look for precedent on it.
KirinDave 8y ago
The way this works is the same for nocompetes. They still put the language in your employment contract, but stipulate that the unenforceable bits (which they don't name) don't invalidate the entire contract. That way, out-of-state contractors can still have less rights; don't worry! Of course, we might see Californian companies simply give up the practice. Your post did conjure in my mind the delightful image of an angry out-of-state contractor shouting into the phone, "Why do I have so many rights?! Why aren't I railroaded by arbitration? Why can't I be locked into a one-sided non-disparage agreement because some executive slid his hand into my pants? I'm furious at all my options here! While I'm at it, I demand you enforce a no-compete clause."
- emodendroket 8y ago
  It's standard practice to include language about how some portions of a contract bring invalid doesn't invalidate the rest of the document just about everywhere, I think.
  - fmajid 8y ago
    It's called severability.
    - emodendroket 8y ago
      Right, that's what I was thinking of. Thanks.
onetimemanytime 8y ago
....or any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce." Not a lawyer, but doesn't a FB engineer writing FB App code from CA affect foreign and intrastate commerce?
- pc86 8y ago
  Affecting ≠ engaged in

marcoperaza 8y ago

There was a case about that provision, Circuit City v. Adams, and it was held that it only works to exclude transportation workers from the FAA. By the legal maxim ejusdem generis, a catch-all provision, like "any other class..." here, is generally interpreted to only include things of the same kind as the previous items in the list. Edit: I had some commentary about the case here, but upon a closer read of the majority and dissenting opinions, it's really not as clear cut as I thought. There's plenty of good reasons to agree or disagree with what the Court did in Circuit City.

DannyBee 8y ago
Thanks. I was just too lazy to look for precedent on it.

KirinDave 8y ago

The way this works is the same for nocompetes. They still put the language in your employment contract, but stipulate that the unenforceable bits (which they don't name) don't invalidate the entire contract. That way, out-of-state contractors can still have less rights; don't worry! Of course, we might see Californian companies simply give up the practice. Your post did conjure in my mind the delightful image of an angry out-of-state contractor shouting into the phone, "Why do I have so many rights?! Why aren't I railroaded by arbitration? Why can't I be locked into a one-sided non-disparage agreement because some executive slid his hand into my pants? I'm furious at all my options here! While I'm at it, I demand you enforce a no-compete clause."

emodendroket 8y ago
It's standard practice to include language about how some portions of a contract bring invalid doesn't invalidate the rest of the document just about everywhere, I think.
- fmajid 8y ago
  It's called severability.
  - emodendroket 8y ago
    Right, that's what I was thinking of. Thanks.

onetimemanytime 8y ago

....or any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce." Not a lawyer, but doesn't a FB engineer writing FB App code from CA affect foreign and intrastate commerce?

pc86 8y ago
Affecting ≠ engaged in